Goggins v. Alliance Capital Management, L.P.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• arguing that because plaintiffs made an unsuccessful demand upon Citigroup’s board of directors, the “issues in these various actions are entirely distinct and without overlap”
• finding the familiarity with applicable law was “neutral with respect to transfer” since either forum was “equally capable” to hear and decide the issues
• finding the familiarity with applicable law was “neutral with respect to transfer” since either forum was “equally capable” to hear and decide the issues
• finding cases related due to “substantial overlap” in allegations and reliance on the same facts even where plaintiffs were different
• transferring securities fraud suit to venue of action alleging same misrepresentations
• “Concerns over judicial efficiency outweigh all other factors in this case, and are dispositive of the issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).